David,

It's also a good idea to segregate the user accounts that will be delegated
OU admins into separate OUs.  The Domain Administrator will control those
OUs.  You do not want to delegate control of an OU to a user or group that
exists within that OU.  This may give them the ability to modify their own
or other accounts that have elevated privileges with consequences that may
compromise your security model.  Groups should segregated as well, groups
are used to control access to resources, and therefore it is desirable to
control the ability to modify group membership.  Delegation to these highly
sensitive OUs should be limited to a few or one trusted individual.

-------------------------------------- 
Robert Contreras III, MCSE/MCT 
INS - International Network Services 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gil Kirkpatrick
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:28 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OU and GPO Design Comments

Hey Tony,

What's the thinking behind the recommendation "not to use Deny" for group
filtering?

-gil

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Murray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 12:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OU and GPO Design Comments


If you use group filtering in this way, it is recommended not to use Deny.
Instead use positive filtering.  To do this, remove the Authenticated Users
group from the ACL and then add the groups you want it to apply to using
Apply Group Policy.

Another approach would be to create an OU layer for delegation of
administration, e.g. User, Computer, etc. and then have OUs at a level below
these for the application of group policy.  For example, under the
Branch->Users OU you could have OUs called General, Lab, VIP, etc. 

Someone else made a point about separate OUs for workstations and laptops.
This is certainly an option, but there may be a way to avoid this by using
WMI filtering in the GPO.  For example, WMI can identify the chassis type of
the machine.  Based on this information you could filter the GPO based on
whether the chassis corresponds to a laptop or workstation.

Tony 

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
Wrom: TZRCLBDXRQBGJSNBOHMKHJYFMYXOEAIJJPHSC
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date:  Tue, 10 Jun 2003 00:04:25 -0400

I'm interested in feedback on the following OU and GPO design.

Simple OU structure, something like:

|--Branches
        |--Users
        |--Computers

The "Users" OU would hold around 5000 users and the "Computers" OU an equal 
amount of workstations and servers.

GPO's would be created for the users and linked to the OU, but only applied 
to certain global groups that the users would be members of.  Similar for 
the computers.  There would be an "All Users" and "All Computers" GPO with 
global settings, then more granular GPO's for departmental specific
settings.

Almost all administration would be done centrally, so there should be 
little need for delegation.

This seems like it should be simple and effective, but we haven't tried it 
real-world, so I'm curious if people have any thoughts on possible 
gotcha's, issues, etc.



--
David

List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/

List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/

Reply via email to